Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T02:10:30.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Generic concepts in the Batocrinidae Wachsmuth and Springer, 1881 (class Crinoidea)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

William I. Ausich  and
Thomas W. Kammer
William I. Ausich
Affiliation:
School of Earth Sciences, 155 South Oval Mall, The Ohio State University, Columbus, 43210,
Thomas W. Kammer
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Geography, West Virginia University, Morgantown 26506-6300,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Batocrinidae was a component of the North America Early Mississippian crinoid fauna and a significant contributor to the global biodiversity spike referred to as the “Age of Crinoids.” All batocrinids are North American, and all but one species are confined to the Tournaisian and Visean. In this contribution, genera are objectively defined on discrete characters, and the generic assignment of all valid species is re-evaluated. A phylogenetic hypothesis is presented for relationships within the Batocrinidae based on parsimony-based analyses and known stratigraphic ranges.

Fifteen basic batocrinid architectural designs are recognized as genera, and four new genera are described: Glannearycrinus n. gen., Gongylocrinus n. gen, Magnuscrinus n. gen., and Simatocrinus n. gen. Batocrinus was a catch-all genus for any Mississippian camerate with tetragonal first primibrachials and an anal tube; thus, many late 19th century species are in need of a modern generic assignment. In this contribution, 61 percent of the 166 currently valid batocrinid species are reassigned to different genera. In addition, Sunwaptacrinus is transferred to the Batocrinidae, six species are transferred out of the Batocrinidae, and five species are designated as nomina dubia.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 84 , Issue 1 , January 2010 , pp. 32 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Angelin, N. P. 1878. Iconographia Crinoideorum: in stratis Sueciae Siluricis fossilium. Samson and Wallin, Holmiae, 62 p.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. 1980. A model for niche differentiation in Lower Mississippian crinoid communities. Journal of Paleontology, 54:273–288.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. 2009. A critical evaluation of the status of crinoids studied by Dr. Gerard Troost (1776–1850). Journal of Paleontology, 83:484–488.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 1990. Systematics and phylogeny of the late Osagean and Meramecian crinoids Platycrinites and Eucladocrinus from the Mississippian stratotype region. Journal of Paleontology, 64:759–778.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 1991. Late Osagean and Meramecian Actinocrinites (Echinodermata: Crinoidea) from the Mississippian stratotype region. Journal of Paleontology, 65:485–499.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 1992. Dizygocrinus: Mississippian camerate crinoid (Echinodermata) from the midcontinental United States. Journal of Paleontology, 66:637–658.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 2006. Stratigraphic and geographic distribution of Lower Carboniferous Crinoidea from England and Wales. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 56(2):91–109.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 2008. Generic concepts in the Amphoracrinidae Bather, 1899 (Class Crinoidea) and evaluation of generic concepts of North American species. Journal of Paleontology, 82:1139–1149.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 2009a. Assembly of the Mississippian crinoid fauna: Invasion, endemic origination, and extinction. North American Paleontological Conference Abstracts, 310.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 2009b. Generic concepts in the Platycrinitidae Austin and Austin, 1842 (Class Crinoidea). Journal of Paleontology, 83:694–717.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Lane, N. G. 1982. Crinoids from the Edwardsville Formation (Lower Mississippian) of southern Indiana. Journal of Paleontology, 56:1343–1361.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Meyer, D. L. 1994. Hybrid crinoids in the fossil record (Early Mississippian, Echinodermata). Paleobiology, 20:362–367.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Sevastopulo, G. D. 2001. Lower Carboniferous (Tournaisian) crinoids from Hook Head, County Wexford, Ireland. Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society 617, 136 p.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., Brett, C. E., Hess, H., and Simms, M. J. 1999. Crinoid form and function, p. 3–30. In Hess, H., Ausich, W. I., Brett, C. E., and Simms, M. J., Fossil Crinoids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S. 1925. Geological fieldwork in Tennessee. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collection, 77:15–19.Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S. and Moodey, M. W. 1943. Bibliographic and faunal index of Paleozoic pelmatozoan echinoderms. Geological Society of America Special Paper 45, 734 p.Google Scholar
Bather, F. A. 1899. A phylogenetic classification of the Pelmatozoa. British Association for the Advancement of Science (1898):916–923.Google Scholar
Breimer, A. 1962. A monograph on Spanish Paleozoic Crinoidea. Overdruk uit Leidse Geologische Mededelingen, Deel, 27, 190 p.Google Scholar
Casseday, S. A. 1854. Beschreibung eines neuen Crinoideengeschlechts aus dem Kohlenkalkstein Nordamerikas. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, 6:237–242.Google Scholar
Casseday, S. A. and Lyon, S. S. 1862. Description of two new genera and eight new species of fossil Crinoidea from the rocks of Indiana and Kentucky. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 5:16–31.Google Scholar
Gahn, F. J. 2002. Crinoid and blastoid biozonation and biodiversity in the Early Mississippian (Osagean) Burlington Limestone, p. 53–74. In Witzke, B. J., Anderson, R. R., Tassier-Surine, S. A., Bunker, B. J., and Artz, J. A. (eds.), Iowa Department of Natural Resources Geological Survey Guidebook 25.Google Scholar
Goldring, W. 1923. The Devonian crinoids of the state of New York. New York State Museum Memoir 16, 670 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1858. Chapter 8. Palaeontology of Iowa, p. 473–724. In Hall, J. and Whitney, J. D., Report of the Geological Survey of the state of Iowa: Embracing the results of investigations made during portions of the years 1855, 56 & 57, v. 1, part II; Palaeontology, p. 473–724, 29 pl., index to Part II separately paginated, 3 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1859. Contributions to the palaeontology of Iowa, being descriptions of new species of Crinoidea and other fossils. Supplement to vol. I, part II, of the Geological Report of Iowa, 92 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1860. Contributions to the palaeontology of Iowa: being descriptions of new species of Crinoidea and other fossils. Iowa Geological Survey supplement to 1(2) of Geological Report of Iowa, 1859a, 4 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1861a. Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Journal of the Boston Society of Natural History, 3:261–328.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1861b. Descriptions of new species of crinoidea; from investigations of the Iowa Geological Survey, Preliminary notice. C. van Benthuysen, Albany, New York, 18 p.Google Scholar
Heckel, P. and Clayton, G. 2005. Official names of the Carboniferous System. Geology Today, 21:213–214.Google Scholar
Itano, W. M., Webster, G. D., Houck, K. J., and Bateman, W. D. 2003. The first Pennsylvanian batocrinid and other new echinoderms from the Minturn Formation of central Colorado. The Mountain Geologist, 40:83–100.Google Scholar
Jaekel, O. 1895. Beiträge zur Kenntniss der palaeozoischen Crinoiden Deutschlands. Paläontologisches Abhandlungen, 7(3):1–116.Google Scholar
Jaekel, O. 1918. Phylogenie und System der Pelmatozoen. Paläeontologische Zeitschrift, 3, 128 p.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Ausich, W. I. 2006. The “Age of Crinoids”: a Mississippian biodiversity spike coincident with widespread carbonate ramps. Palaios, 21:236–248.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Ausich, W. I. 2007. Stratigraphical and geographical distribution of Mississippian Crinoidea from Scotland. Earth and Environmental Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 98:139–150.Google Scholar
Keyes, C. R. 1894. Paleontology of Missouri, part I. Missouri Geological Survey, 4:143–225.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1943. A revision of the genus Steganocrinus . Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 33:259–265.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1945. Four new genera of camerate crinoids from the Devonian. American Journal of Science, 243:341–345.Google Scholar
Koninck, L. G. de, and le Hon, H. 1854. Recherches sur les crinoides du terrain carbonifere de la Belgique. Academie Royal de Belgique Memoir 28(3), 215 p.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1958. The monobathrid camerate crinod family: Batocrinidae. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kansas, Lawrence, 259 p.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1963a. Two new Mississippian camerate (Batocrinidae) crinoid genera. Journal of Paleontology, 37:691–702.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1963b. Meristic variation in the dorsal cup of monobathrid camerate crinoids. Journal of Paleontology, 37:917–930.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1978. Family Batocrinidae Wachsmuth and Springer, 1881, p. T466–T471. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, K. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Pt. T(2). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder and Lawrence.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. and Sevastopulo, G. D. 1987. Stratigraphic distribution of Mississippian camerate genera from North America and Western Europe. Courier Forschugsinstitut Senckenberg, 98:199–206.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G., Waters, J. A., and Maples, C. G. 1997. Echinoderm faunas of the Hongguleleng Formation, Late Devonian (Famennian), Xinjiang-Uygur Autonomous Region, People's Republic of China. Journal of Paleontology Memoir 47(Supplement to 71(2)), 43 p.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. 1933. The stratigraphy and paleontology of the Gilmore City Formation of Iowa. University of Iowa Studies, 15, 74 p.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. and Severson, J. L. 1953. New crinoid fauna, Mississippian, Lodgepole Formation, Montana. Journal of Paleontology, 27:505–536.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R., Parks, J. M., and Spreng, A. C. 1952. Mississippian crinoid fauna from the Banff Formation Sunwapta Pass, Alberta. Journal of Paleontology, 26:544–575.Google Scholar
Lee, K., Ausich, W. I., and Kammer, T. W. 2005. Crinoids from the Nada Member of the Borden Formation (Lower Mississippian) in eastern Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology, 79:337–355.Google Scholar
Lyon, S. S. and Casseday, S. A. 1859. Description of nine new species of crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana and Kentucky. American Journal of Science and Arts, series 2, 28:233–246.Google Scholar
Lyon, S. S. and Casseday, S. A. 1860. Description of nine new species of crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana and Kentucky. American Journal of Science and Arts, ser. 2, 29:68–79.Google Scholar
McChesney, J. H. 1859. Descriptions of new species of fossils from the Palaeozoic rocks of the western states. Transactions of the Chicago Academy of Sciences, 1, 76 p.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1860. Descriptions of new species of crinoidea and echinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of Illinois, and other western states. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 12:379–397.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1861. Descriptions of new Palaeozoic fossils from Illinois and Iowa. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 13:128–148.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1865. Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea, etc. from the Paleozoic rocks of Illinois and some of the adjoining states. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 17:143–155.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1868. Remarks on some types of Carboniferous crinoidea, with descriptions of new genera and species of the same, and of one echinoid. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 20:335–359.Google Scholar
Miller, J. S. 1821. A natural history of the Crinoidea, or lily-shaped animals; with observations on the genera, Asteria, Euryale, Comatula and Marsupites. Bryan and Co., l, 150 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1891. Palaeontology. Advance sheets. Indiana Department of Geology and Natural Resources, 17th Annual Report, 103 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1892. North American geology and paleontology, first appendix. Western Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnati:665–718.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1897. Second appendix to North American geology and palaeontology. Western Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnati:719–793.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1890a. Description of some new genera and species of Echinodermata from the Coal Measures and Subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana, Missouri, and Iowa. Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 13:1–25.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1890b. Description of some new genera and species of Echinodermata from the Coal Measures and Subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana, Missouri, and Iowa, 59 [privately published].Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1893. Description of some new species of invertebrates from the Palaeozoic rocks of Illinois and adjacent states. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 3, 81 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1894a. Upper Devonian and Niagara crinoids. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 4, 37 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1894b. New genera and species of Echinodermata. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 5, 53 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1895a. Description of new species of Palaeozoic Echinodermata. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 6, 62 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1895b. New and interesting species of Palaeozoic fossils. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 7, 89 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1896a. Description of new and remarkable fossils from the Palaeozoic rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 8, 65 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1896b. New species of crinoids from Illinois and other states. Illinois State Museum Bulletin, 9, 66 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1896c. New species of Echinodermata and a new crustacean from the Palaeozoic rocks. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 10, 91 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1897. New species of crinoids, cephalopods, and other Palaeozoic fossils. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 12, 69 p.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. and Laudon, L. R. 1943. Evolution and classification of Paleozoic crinoids. Geological Society of America Special Paper 46, 151 p.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. and Laudon, L. R. 1944. Class Crinoidea, p. 137–209. In Shimer, H. W. and Shrock, R. R., Index fossils of North America. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Müller, J. 1840. Über den bau des Pentacrinus Caput. Medusae. Berlin Berricht, p. 88–106; Berlin, Abhandlungen der Königlichen Academie der Wissenschafften zu Berlin 1841:177–248; Froriep Notizen 17, 1841, col. 178–202: Wiegman Archiv v. 6 (1840), p. 307–318.Google Scholar
Opitz, R. 1932. Bilder aus der Erdgeschichte des Nahe-Hunsrück-Landes-Birkenfeld. Birkenfeld, Hugo Enke, 224 p.Google Scholar
Roemer, C. F. 1852–1854. Erste Periode, Kohlen-Gebirge, p. 210–291. In Bronn, H. G., Lethaea Geognostica, 1851–1856, 3rd edit. E. Schweizerbart, Stuttgart, 2.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R. 1890. Batocrinus calvini. Description of a new species of Burlington Crinoid. American Geologist, 5:146–147.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R. 1893. Description of some new species of crinoids, blastoids and brachiopods from the Devonian and subcarboniferous rocks of Missouri. American Geologist, 12:303–309.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R. 1900. New species of crinoids, blastoids and cystoids from Missouri. American Geologist, 25:65–75.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R. 1902. New species of fossils from the Subcarboniferous rocks of Northeastern Missouri. American Geologist, 29:303–310.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R., 1906, Description of fossils, p. 27–31. In Greene, G. K., Contribution to Indiana palaeontology. New Albany, Indiana, 2(2).Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R. 1908. The geology of Pike County. Missouri Bureau Geology and Mines, series 2, 8, 124 p.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R., and Hare, S. J. 1891a. Description of some new species of Echinodermata from the sub-Carboniferous rocks of Pike County, Mo. Kansas City Scientist, 5(7):97–103.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R., and Hare, S. J. 1891b. Description of some new species of crinoids and blastoids from the Sub-carboniferous rocks of Pike and Marion Counties, Mo., and Scott County, Va. Kansas City Scientist, 5(8):113–118.Google Scholar
Shumard, B. F. 1855. Description of new species of organic remains. Missouri Geological Survey, 2:185–208.Google Scholar
Shumard, B. F. 1858. Description of new fossil Crinoidea from the Palaeozoic rocks of the western and southern portions of the United States. Transactions of the St. Louis Academy of Science 1:71–80.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1978a. Skeletal morphology of fossil crinoids, p. T58–T216. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, K. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Pt. T(2). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder and Lawrence.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1978b. Camerata, p. T408–T518. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, K. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Pt. T(2). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder and Lawrence.Google Scholar
Van Sant, J. F. 1964. Crawfordsville crinoids, p. 34–136. In Van Sant, J. F. and Lane, M. G., Crawfordsville (Indiana) crinoid studies. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Article 7.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1889. In Miller, S. A., North American Geology and Paleontology. Cincinnati, Western Methodist Book Concern, 664 p.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1880–1886. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Pt. I. The families Ichthyocrinidae and Cyathocrinidae (1880):226–378, (separate repaged p. 1–153); Pt. II. Family Sphaeroidocrinidae, with the sub-families Platycrinidae, Rhodocrinidae, and Actinocrinidae (1881):177–411 (separate repaged, p. 1–237); Pt. III, Sec. 1. Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions (1885):225–364 (separate repaged, p. 1–138); Pt. III, Sec. 2. Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions (1886):64–226 (separate repaged to continue with section 1, p. 139–302).Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1897. The North American Crinoidea Camerata. Harvard College Museum of Comparative Zoology Memoirs, 20 and 21, 897 p.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 2003. Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids, coronates, and hemistreptocrinids 1758–1999. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 363, <http://crinoid.gsajournals.org/crinoidmod>..>Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. and Lane, N. G. 1987. Crinoids from the Anchor Limestone (Lower Mississippian) of the Monte Cristo Group Southern Nevada. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions Paper, 119, 55 p.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. and Waters, J. A. 2009. Late Devonian echinoderms from the Hongguleleng Formation of northwestern China. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 314:263–287.Google Scholar
Weller, S. 1898. A bibliographic index of Carboniferous invertebrates. U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 153, 653 p.Google Scholar
Weller, S. 1920. The Geology of Hardin County, Chapter 13, Paleontology. Illinois Geological Survey, Bulletin, 41:313–377.Google Scholar
White, C. A. 1862. Description of new species of fossils from the Devonian and Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Boston Society of Natural History Journal, 9:8–33.Google Scholar
Wood, E. 1909. A critical summary of Troost's unpublished manuscript on the crinoids of Tennessee. U.S. National Museum Bulletin 64, 150 p.Google Scholar
Worthen, A. H. 1884. Descriptions of two new species of Crustacea, fifty-one species of Mollusca, and three species of crinoids, from the Carboniferous formations of Illinois and adjacent states. Illinois State Museum of Natural History Bulletin 2, 27 p.Google Scholar
Worthen, A. H. 1890. Description of fossil invertebrates. Illinois Geological Survey, 8:69–154.Google Scholar
Wright, J. 1950–1960. The British Carboniferous Crinoidea. Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society, 1(1):1–24, 1950; 1(2):25–46, 1951a; 1(3):47–102, 1951b; 1(4):103–148, 1952a; 1(5):149–190, 1954a; 2(1):191–254, 1955a; 2(2):255–272, 1955b; 2(3):273–306, 1956b; 2(4):307–328, 1958; 2(5):329–347, 1960.Google Scholar
Yandell, L. P. and Shumard, B. F., 1855. p. 182–208. In Shumard, B. F., Description of new species of organic remains. Missouri Geological Survey, 2.Google Scholar
Zittel, K. A. von. 1876–1880. Handbuch der Palaeontologie, v. 1, Palaeozoologie, R. Oldenbourg, München, Leipzig, 765 p.Google Scholar